| Comment Number: | 522418-01259 |
| Received: | 6/7/2006 1:00:11 PM |
| Organization: | Independent Mannatech Assoicate |
| Commenter: | Cindy Horeis |
| State: | NE |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Cindy S. Horeis Independent Mannatech Associate June 7, 2006 Dear Sir: I am writing this letter to in regards to the proposed Business Opportunity Rule R511993. I believe that in its present form, it could prevent me from continuing as an Independent Mannatech Consultant. I understand that part of the FTC’s responsibilities is to protect the public from “unfair and deceptive practices,” but some of the sections in the proposed rule will make it very difficult if not impossible for me to sell Mannatech products. I am very opposed to this rule. There are many other types of consumer services that carry a greater risk than purchasing makeup, supplements, cutlery, or music. For example: purchasing a new or used car, cosmetic surgery or other products and services that require nothing more than the exchange of currency. One of the most confusing and burdensome sections of the proposed rule is the seven day waiting period to enroll new Associates. Mannatech sales kits only cost $99.00. People buy TVs, cars, and other items that cost much more than that and they do not have to wait seven days. This waiting period gives the impression that might be something wrong with the plan we offer. I also think this seven-day waiting period is unnecessary, because Mannatech already has a 90% buyback policy for all products including sales kits purchased by a salesman within the last twelve months. Under this waiting period requirement, I will need to keep very detailed records when I first speak to someone about Mannatech and will then have to send in many reports to Mannatech headquarters. This proposed rule also calls for the release of any information regarding lawsuits involving misrepresentation, or unfair or deceptive practices. It does not matter if the company was found innocent. Today, anyone or any company can be sued for almost anything for what ever reason they happen to fancy at the moment. It simply does not make any logical sense to me that I would have to disclose these lawsuits unless Mannatech is found guilty. Otherwise, Mannatech and I are put at very large and unfair disadvantage even though Mannatech has done nothing wrong. Finally, the proposed rule requires the disclosure of a minimum of 10 prior purchasers nearest to the prospective purchaser. I am glad to provide references, but in this day of identity theft, I am very uncomfortable giving out any personal information of individuals (without their approval) to strangers. Also, giving away this information could damage business relationships of the references who may be involved in other companies or businesses including competitors. In order to get the list of 10 prior purchasers, I will need to send the address of the prospective purchaser to Mannatech headquarters and then wait for the list. I also think the following sentence required by the proposed rule will prevent many people from wanting to sign up as a salesperson. “If you buy a business opportunity from the seller, your contact information can be disclosed in the future to other buyers.” People are very concerned about their privacy and identity, now you want to make all this public. They will be reluctant to share their personal information with individuals they may have never met .I have been an Independent Mannatech Associate for two years. I became involved with this company because of the great help we offer to others. In the beginning I became a consumer of the products and quickly learned how much benefit these products had and felt the need to share with others. Also, Mannatech offered a way for me to supplement my family’s income. Now my family depends on this extra income to meet our monthly expenses. This would be a great loss financially for our family if I could not continue to serve others in this way. I appreciate the work of the FTC to protect consumers, but I believe this proposed new rule has many unseen and unintended consequences not only for the seller, purch